Speaker of the House of Representatives Carmelo Abela has ruled that a statement issued by the Nationalist Party concerning parliamentary business was incorrect in its account of a meeting of the Committee on the Business of the House.

In his ruling, Abela referred to a complaint raised by Government Whip Naomi Cachia after Question Time during the parliamentary sitting on Monday 5 October 2026.

Cachia had drawn the Speaker’s attention to a PN statement published on 28 September 2026, entitled “Government blocks Parliament from discussing Opposition Bill to implement recommendations of the Daphne Caruana Galizia public inquiry.”

The Government Whip argued that the statement did not accurately reflect what had taken place during the committee meeting. She specifically disputed its suggestion that the government had used parliamentary procedure to block an Opposition bill.

Cachia maintained that the procedural motion in question did not block any Opposition motion and that no discussion had taken place during the meeting about any specific bill tabled by the Opposition. She subsequently requested the Speaker’s direction on the matter.

Abela said he had also heard Opposition Whip Ivan Castillo before informing the House that he would deliver his ruling at a later stage.

In his ruling, the Speaker referred to the Committee on the Business of the House meeting held on 28 September, which he chaired to discuss Parliament’s work programme for the following weeks.

He noted that the list of pending parliamentary business circulated to members at the meeting included three Opposition motions. The first was Motion 47 - A bill aimed at combating loneliness and strengthening social wellbeing, presented by MP Ivan Bartolo on 20 July 2026. The second was Motion 56 - A motion of no confidence in the Minister for Energy and the Environment, presented by Opposition Leader Alex Borg and MP Mark Anthony Sammut on 22 July 2026. The third was Motion 59 - A motion concerning the implementation of recommendations made by the public inquiry board into the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia, presented by Borg on 4 September 2026.

However, Abela said the omnibus bill referred to in the PN statement did not appear on the list of pending business before the committee at the time of the meeting. He added that the bill had still not been presented by the Opposition at the time he delivered his ruling.

The Speaker therefore concluded that the PN statement was incorrect in its account of the committee’s proceedings, as the omnibus bill had not been mentioned during the meeting and, according to the ruling, had not yet been formally presented.

He said the interpretation of events set out in the statement was based on incorrect premises.

While acknowledging the Opposition’s call for private members to have more opportunities to submit proposals to the House and participate fully in parliamentary debate, Abela stressed the importance of accurately reporting parliamentary proceedings.

He said the work of the House and the discussions held within it should be reported faithfully, fairly and in a balanced manner across all forms of communication.

The Speaker added that the responsibility was greater in this case because the statement had been issued by a political party represented in Parliament.

While political interpretation remained legitimate, he said, the reporting of facts was not a matter of interpretation.

In light of his findings, Abela instructed the Clerk of the House to forward a copy of the ruling to the Nationalist Party’s Communications Office so that the necessary corrections could be made to the 28 September statement.